[url]http://www.nraila.org/NewsCenter.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=1971[/url]
or
NRA Assists 12 Year-old in Civil Rights Violation Fight
Today, the National Rifle Association's (NRA) Civil Rights Defense Fund filed a First Amendment civil rights lawsuit on behalf of 12 year-old Virginia NRA member, Alan Newsom. The lawsuit charges the principal and vice-principal of the Jack Jouett Middle School and Albemarle County School Board Superintendent and Board members with violating Newsom's civil rights when they banned him from wearing a NRA logo-ed Youth Sports Shooting Camp shirt to school.
On or about April 29, 2002, Alan Newsom was forced to remove his NRA Sports Shooting Camp t-shirt by the vice-principal and told to turn the t-shirt inside out because she considered the NRA shirt illustrations of individuals involved in shooting sports in violation of school policy. Although Newsom was ordered to forfeit his right to free speech and association under threat of school suspension, at the time of the demand there was no rule that prohibited clothing depicting shooting sports.
When the NRA notified school authorities that the action violated the student's civil rights, the school subsequently added a provision for the 2002-2003 school year barring any clothing associated with "weapons" and "violence."
"The facts are clear. Alan Newsom was singled-out by the vice-principal because he was wearing a NRA t-shirt. The t-shirt clearly depicts individuals involved in shooting sports. The images are in no way inappropriate or violent. This is a blatant infringement of young Alan's Constitutional rights. I was dumbfounded when I learned of the facts of this case after Alan's parents contacted us and didn't hesitate to take up this challenge. I am proud to say that the NRA stands with this brave young man," NRA's Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre said of the case.
The lawsuit, which seeks $100,000 in damages and $50,000 in punitive damages plus costs and attorney fees incurred in vindicating Newsom's civil rights, was filed in the U.S. Federal District Court for Western District of Virginia, Charlottesville Division. Among the twelve counts included in the Federal suit are free speech and due process violations under federal and state constitutions.
"The NRA wholeheartedly supports the reasonable prohibition of images on clothing depicting violence in a school setting. However, to preclude a student from wearing an article of clothing because it may run counter to the viewpoints or political beliefs of some school officials is deplorable," LaPierre added. In Tinker v. Des Moines School District, the U.S. Supreme Court held "[i]n order for the State in the person of the school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expressed opinion, it must be able to show that its actions were caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.
The lawsuit also challenges the ambiguity of the new school rule which will not only affect all NRA logos, but also the Great Seal of the United States, the United States Army logo and the state seal of the Commonwealth of Virginia – all with images of "weapons" that would fall within the prohibitions of the school's new policy.
"This is clearly a case of political-correctness running unchecked. Alan is a good student who has no disciplinary problems in school. He developed an affinity for shooting sports and his father enrolled him in a NRA Youth Safety Camp to learn basic firearm safety. Alan aspires to represent his country in the Olympics someday. The school authorities harassed and breached Alan's First Amendment rights merely for his interest in the NRA and shooting sports," LaPierre concluded.
The lawsuit noted that, ironically, Jack Jouett Middle School is named for an American Revolutionary War hero who is known for his famous ride on June 3, 1781, in which despite the potential for personal peril, he rode through the night from Louisa, VA to Monticello to warn Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry and other parties that British troops were on their way to arrest Jefferson and others for signing the Declaration of Independence. In appreciation for this act of bravery the Virginia Legislature awarded Captain Jack Jouett a sword and a pair of pistols.
The 131 year-old NRA is the nation's oldest civil rights group that advocates enforcement of existing laws to prosecute and punish violent criminals. The NRA is the nation's leader in teaching youth gun safety and promoting marksmanship nationwide. The Association has about 4 million members across America.
******************************************
Glad to see some tax dollars might go to the NRA. The same stinky school system tried to make me turn various shirts around when I used to go there. Stick it to 'em NRA [beer]
____________________________________________
[marines]

How is it that shooting is automatically associated with violence? I didn't know that Camp Perry was 'violent'.... unless you are the paper of course. That must be it! Ban guns... do it for those poor paper targets.

I love to go down to the schoolyard and watch all the little children jump up and down and run around yelling and screaming. They don't know I'm only using blanks.

This should be very interesting.
Especially considering that the precedent has been set regarding shirts with controversial messages.
The school policies don't stand a chance, if the court recognizes the 2 month old ruling on the anarchy chick's shirts.

Are we having a philosophical discussion here, or am I being reprimanded?

I'm gonna wear my molon labe hat and my shirt that says "politicians prefer unarmed peasants buy a gun piss off a liberal" tommorrow for my first day of school. In case you havent figured it out yet I am a senior. Lots of fun to be had this year:)

[15:20] <SubnetMask> Oh YEAH?!!! Well...Well...as soon as I get those better magazines, smooth the rails, change the sights, and replace the extractor...THEN we'll see who's laughing, there buddy boy.

Guys, we just covered this area of law in law school. The prevalent test is that if the censored expression contains a viable religious or political connotation, and is not obscene or vulgar, and does not distract from the educational process, the expression is to be protected. I can cite case law if anyone is interested.
Trickshot, I understand your point of view, but we are fighting a cultural war here, and if the NRA has to step into the courtroom to prevent our culture from being systematically marginalized even further, then I'm all for it. How much you wanna bet that the school would let students wear Million Mom March or "First Day" shirts? Make no mistake, its a cultural war and only the constitution stands between us and these people.

With your sights on center chest, twice your trigger you have pressed. If those two fail to stop the fight, a shot to the head will set things right!

Originally Posted By trickshot:
Instead of working to roll back all the idiotic gun laws, the NRA is wasting our money with this dog & pony show. What a fucking joke!

View Quote

Point taken. But still, some of these small battles can make a big difference. Think about what message it is sending to the students. The Principle (the man) is against you having free expression and guns. They will now understand that these are freedoms that need to be fought for, not just in war but also in the courts. We may have just won a bunch of young minds to our side.

Batman -
Could you please post the cites? Against my better judgement, and despite my lack of patience with the entire tort process, I am trying to kick over a personal interest in law...
This does not change my base opinion, tho - the America Legal System is currently at risk of collapsing under its own weight. Perhaps it will become a point singularity - I wonder how far out the Event Horizon would be? Comments?
FFZ

Anarchist Slut v. NRA Boy
Looks like a completely different set of facts. In one, you have a school policy that has nothing to do with violence and the other, you have a girl about to get killed because of her image.
I think they'd have to show some correlation between the images of weapons and violence, while in the other, there's a DIRECT, OBVIOUS AND EMMINENT danger to the psycho slut wench.
I think they'll allow the kid to wear the shirt, since the only distraction in school is what the teachers are creating!

Originally Posted By COZ_cal_45acp:
Well, I guess he could have been wearing one of these..
[url]http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/tshirt.php?sku=a20[/url]
[url]http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/tshirt.php?sku=a03[/url]

Originally Posted By FreeFireZone:
Batman -
Could you please post the cites?
--------------
This does not change my base opinion, tho - the America Legal System is currently at risk of collapsing under its own weight.
FFZ

View Quote

I'll look up the cases later tonight and post em. Oh yeah, after a year interning in state politics in Jefferson City and two years of law school, all I have to say is, I don't have a closet full of main battle rifles and AR15s because I TRUST the legal system or the government! In my humble opinion, the one thing that keeps the US from being just like every other 3rd world shithole in the world is our prosperity. What happens when that prosperity goes away?
Look at Yugoslavia--while they had economic support (and an iron fist) from the Soviet Union, it was held up as a model of "diversity", ethnically and culturally. Once the iron fist and the economy went away, the SHTF worse than anyone could have imagined.
I could go on an even bigger soap box and sometime maybe I will. But suffice to say, imho, there are cultural wars being fought in the courts and in the government, and sometimes in the streets too. If the economy collapses or some president decides he doesn't feel the need to be re-elected anymore (for example), the government and the courts will lose even more legitimacy than they have lost already. Which will leave what forums open in which to fight these cultural battles?

With your sights on center chest, twice your trigger you have pressed. If those two fail to stop the fight, a shot to the head will set things right!

Now that 2nd shirt COZ is just not right. [:X*]
Anyway, the kid didn't really initiat it this time. He told his dad what happened adn his dad e-mailed the NRA, well, here is the local papers story from yesterday....
[url]http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/MGB8D3NQ86D.html[/url]

Originally Posted By DoubleFeed:
This should be very interesting.
Especially considering that the precedent has been set regarding shirts with controversial messages.
The school policies don't stand a chance, if the court recognizes the 2 month old ruling on the anarchy chick's shirts.

View Quote

I remember when this suit was filed, but I didn't hear the results. Do you have a link to the story?

Originally Posted By --BATMAN--:
Guys, we just covered this area of law in law school. The prevalent test is that if the censored expression contains a viable religious or political connotation, and is not obscene or vulgar, and does not distract from the educational process, the expression is to be protected. I can cite case law if anyone is interested.

View Quote

Have any courts considered some type of firearm related expression political? The courts seem willing to uphold all sorts of seemingly unconstitutional restrictions on ownership and use of firearms. What is to stop them here? I'd be interested in the case law, too.
Thanks

Ok guys, not only did I find the cite, UMKC's website has an abridged version of the opinion online. It has all the important stuff, you can skip the crap that way. The case is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, back from 1969. Here's the link for your reading pleasure. There have been more recent rulings but they all stem from this one and the test has remained the same.
Here's the link:
[url]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/firstamendment/tinker.html[/url]
And here is the link to Bethel School District v. Fraser which is a good case distinguishing Tinker and adding somewhat to the test. In this case a student's campaign speech on behalf of another student running for a "student senate" position was not permissible because it was not connected to a bona fide political activity, plus it disrupted the hell out of the educational process. Its kind of funny to read, I'd say the definitions of "obscenity", as vague as they are, have gotten much more lenient since 1983!
[url]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/firstamendment/bethel.html[/url]

With your sights on center chest, twice your trigger you have pressed. If those two fail to stop the fight, a shot to the head will set things right!